About your Search

20121112
20121120
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
closing loopholes. that is a reputation of what john boehner suggested in the days since the president has been re-elected. >> that's totally right. a key point, the simpson-bowles tax idea is kind of a magic pony, right. everyone agrees in the ab instruct, we can bring down the rates, close loopholes and deductions and raise revenue. if that's such a wonderful idea how come it's only come up now. how come no one has done it. the reason is because it's really, really hard politically. once you get into the specifics. if you're trying to tie all the revenue to this abstract tax reform idea you're going to get into a position where the revenue is about never going to happen because once you get into reality it doesn't materialize. >> you have to do both, john. you have to do -- you have to raise the the rates and close loopholes to get the amount -- >> just raise the rates. >> you can't raise the rates high enough to produce $1.6 trillion. >> you can get $900 billion from expiring the bush tax cuts. >> and where do you get the other $700 billion from from. >> do a little reform and cut the r
they already agreed to that. i think you heard john boehner say that already. we've had votes in the senate where we've actually gotten rid of tax credits. i think that's a given. and i think the vast majority of americans agree with that. the question is how do you do that and how do you allow taxes to rise at the same time you fix the real problem? and the real problem is uncontrolled entitlement spending and a government that has grown massively. not just under this administration, under republican administration. >> let me turn to senator schumer on this point. >> so you have to approach both sides of it. >> let me turn to senator schumer. i'm going to ask you the same question. if the mandate is compromised, what do democrats have to be prepared to accept as a painful outcome in order to achieve compromise? >> well, i agree with you, the mandate is compromise. that's why we have a divided house and senate. and i think if the house stands for anything it's cut government spending, as tom coburn said, and i think we're going to have to do more of it. we heard the mandate in 2010, where i
directly at odds with house speaker john boehner. >> could you accept a deal that does not include tax rate increases for the wealthy? we've seen talk about a possible compromise that could leave rates the same but cap deductions for high-income earners. is that something that's acceptable? >> no. >> not at all no, way? >> no. the preponderance made it very clear in his campaign that there are not enough -- what you just described is a formula and a blueprint for hampering our future. you cannot go forward -- you have to cut some investments. if you cut too many you are hampering growth, you're hampering education, investments for the future. >> and even thousands of miles away it appears president obama is still focused on those negotiations. while touring a royal monastery with secretary of state clinton in thailand the president was overheard mentioning the budget talks to a monk. the president later clarified his comments -- >> he's not any monk. >> no. >> he has some big i vestments in the stock market. >> he later clarified his comments at a news conference. >> yes, we were working on
would be willing to accept and double the amount that speaker boehner had offered the president during their debt negotiations last year. today the president is scheduled to meet with ceos from a dozen companies. there's some of them on your screen. general electric, ford, ibm all playing a part. they'll discuss ways to work together and try to find a balanced approach to reducing the deficit. during a closed-door meeting yesterday with union leaders and liberal supporters, president obama reportedly vowed that he would, quote, not budge when it comes to letting the bush tax cuts expire for the country's highest earners. labor leader and president of the afl-cio, richard trumka, was among those at the white house meeting. he said he and the president are on the same page. >> we're very, very committed to making sure that the middle class and workers don't end up paying the tab for a party that we didn't get to go to. the president led with that notion of protecting the middle class, and now you have republicans that have it in their power, they could sign a bill tomorrow that protects
.6 trillion of new revenue. boehner had agreed to $800 billion. it's not hard to find $1.2 trillion as a kind of middle ground to that. then you want to have $4 trillion of total deficit reduction, so that leaves $2.8 trillion of spending reductions that have to happen. here's what people miss. we can avoid going over the cliff with the stroke of a pen. they can just extend all this stuff and kick the can down the road. the real question is are we going to have a big deal? are we going to agree on the major spending restraints that we need as well as the tax stuff in order to actually get the deficit under control? and i think the betting on that is less than 50%. i think we have a great shot at it. but it's going to be really, really hard. >> is that the view from wall street, too? they're not totally confident that this is going to happen? >> what you see in the stock market at the moment is that wall street is not totally confident. that's for sure. >> all right. steve, thanks so much. >> pleasure. >>> coming up, independent senator-elect of maine, angus king joins the conversation. he's a
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)